<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rdf:RDF
  xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
  xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
  xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/"
  xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
		
<channel rdf:about="http://www.kildarestreet.com/mp/?pid=202">
<title>Michael Mulcahy - Recent appearances (From KildareStreet.com)</title>
<link>http://www.kildarestreet.com/mp/?pid=202</link>
<description></description>
<dc:language>en-gb</dc:language>
<dc:creator>KildareStreet.com, mprss.php script</dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-04-15T16:11:20+00:00</dc:date>

<items>
<rdf:Seq>
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-02-19.201.0&amp;m=593#g353.0" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-02-19.201.0&amp;m=593#g351.0" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-02-19.201.0&amp;m=593#g349.0" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-02-19.201.0&amp;m=593#g347.0" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-02-11.784.0&amp;m=593#g1016.0" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-02-11.784.0&amp;m=593#g839.0" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-02-04.423.0&amp;m=593#g552.0" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-02-04.423.0&amp;m=593#g550.0" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2008-11-20.293.0&amp;m=593#g314.0" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2008-10-14.704.0&amp;m=593#g733.0" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2008-10-14.704.0&amp;m=593#g731.0" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2008-10-14.427.0&amp;m=593#g452.0" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2008-10-14.427.0&amp;m=593#g450.0" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2008-10-01.687.0&amp;m=593#g765.0" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2008-10-01.687.0&amp;m=593#g762.0" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2008-10-01.687.0&amp;m=593#g760.0" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2008-10-01.687.0&amp;m=593#g714.0" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2008-10-01.372.0&amp;m=593#g479.0" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2008-10-01.372.0&amp;m=593#g477.0" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2008-10-01.372.0&amp;m=593#g475.0" />
</rdf:Seq>
</items>

</channel>

<item rdf:about="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-02-19.201.0&amp;m=593#g353.0">
	<title>Financial Emergency Measures in the Public Interest Bill 2009: Second Stage | D&amp;aacute;il debates</title>
	<link>http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-02-19.201.0&amp;m=593#g353.0</link>
	<description>They are sleepwalking through the fact that virtually every western industrialised country is suffering its most severe recession or near depression for the past 40 years.  They think Ireland is...</description>
	<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p pid="353.1">They are sleepwalking through the fact that virtually every western industrialised country is suffering its most severe recession or near depression for the past 40 years.  They think Ireland is a unique case and it has done something particularly bad.  I invite Opposition Members to visit Japan, Britain or the USA.  In January, more than 500,000 people lost their jobs in the USA and every leader, including President Obama, has declared the recession to be the most serious financial crisis facing Western economies since the Great Depression in the 1930s and yet, for naked political reasons, Fine Gael and the Labour Party are spinning the line that Ireland is in the worst position and so on.</p><p pid="353.2">The Minister for Finance has clarified, particularly in the context of our banks, which are crucial to the proper conduct of business in the State, that Opposition criticism in the House is undermining confidence in our banks and our reputation internationally in commercial markets and it could do long-term damage to the economy.  It is high time the fightback started against these Members, who are completely irresponsible.  It is about time they showed a little support to Ireland Inc. and stopped talking it down.</p><p pid="353.3">To give some credit where credit is due, as I recall it, the Labour Party voted against the bank guarantee scheme but Fine Gael supported it.  There was absolutely no choice at the time but to support the banks and introduce that guarantee.  There was virtually a run on the banks at that stage.  Lest anyone give the wrong impression that it was just Ireland, they should consider the state of the banks in Britain, including the great Lloyds, Barclays and Royal Bank of Scotland.  All of these banks have been brought to their knees by one of the greatest financial shocks the western world has seen perhaps in the past 100 years.  We needed to take action and we took action.</p><p pid="353.4">We then had the case of Anglo Irish Bank where the Minister made it clear that if this bank failed there would be a systemic risk to the entire Irish economy.  It was not just internalised in Ireland because there are counterpart banks all over the world.  How would the Opposition like the headline: “Irish bank defaults on its international obligations”?  Would any international businessman or businesswoman touch Ireland with a barge pole for the next 20 years?  I fully commend the Minister for Finance on what he did on that occasion.  It is about time that the Opposition parties started to support the Minister for Finance instead of niggling through every line out of which it possibly can get a cheap headline.</p><p pid="353.5">Of course nobody likes emergency measures.  I sympathise with those public servants, the majority of whom do a great job.  I sympathise with them being faced with the extra financial burden.  However, the Government is committed to those public servants.  It is committed to their continued employment if at all possible and to providing them with good pensions on their retirement.  This is a mechanism necessary to provide them with those pensions.  When people have come into my clinic and complained about this levy, I have looked them in the eye and said that I am sorry but that we will do what is necessary for the future of the country and for the future of their employment.</p><p pid="353.6">People should be aware that given the scale of that gap between €37 billion and €55 billion, we are in for even more difficult times in the future.  The Taoiseach outlined a schedule, of which the European Union is fully aware.  Next year there need to be cuts of €4 billion, with further cuts of €4 billion, €3.5 billion and €3 billion in the following years.  That is a lot of pain, but that pain must be borne if we want to get Ireland back to a sustainable level and if we want to get people back in jobs, buying motorcars and houses, going to restaurants and enjoying the type of normal life we have had for so long.  However, let us stick to the truth.  I accept it is possible to say we should have done more with the property market in recent years.  It is very difficult when we do not control our own interest rates.</p><p pid="353.7">Another myth that is promulgated is that nothing positive was achieved with all the surplus moneys we had from the Celtic tiger.  People conveniently forget the great reduction in our national debt.  The Opposition conveniently forgets the money put aside in the pensions reserve fund.  It conveniently forgets all the great progress with the new roads, bridges, Luas lines etc.  In this difficult debate I call for a little bit of honesty around this Chamber.  Let us accept our failings, but let us have the decency, honour and integrity to be honest in one of the most difficult debates of our time.  I commend this very important, serious and necessary emergency Bill to the House for the sake of our country.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	<dc:date>2009-02-19T13:00:00+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-02-19.201.0&amp;m=593#g351.0">
	<title>Financial Emergency Measures in the Public Interest Bill 2009: Second Stage | D&amp;aacute;il debates</title>
	<link>http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-02-19.201.0&amp;m=593#g351.0</link>
	<description>Part of the way they have done this is to spread the myth that the downturn is an entirely Irish creation.</description>
	<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p pid="351.1">Part of the way they have done this is to spread the myth that the downturn is an entirely Irish creation.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	<dc:date>2009-02-19T13:00:00+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-02-19.201.0&amp;m=593#g349.0">
	<title>Financial Emergency Measures in the Public Interest Bill 2009: Second Stage | D&amp;aacute;il debates</title>
	<link>http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-02-19.201.0&amp;m=593#g349.0</link>
	<description>The more the business community is undermined and talked down, the more confidence in it will be destroyed.  All public services require a vibrant business community to sustain everything....</description>
	<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p pid="349.1">The more the business community is undermined and talked down, the more confidence in it will be destroyed.  All public services require a vibrant business community to sustain everything.  Without healthy companies and people setting up their own businesses and working hard to increase wealth, there will not be revenue for anything.  Given the position in which we find ourselves, there is a serious responsibility on all Opposition parties and not only the Government parties to take their obligations to the State seriously.  They have fallen short on that responsibility thus far.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	<dc:date>2009-02-19T13:00:00+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-02-19.201.0&amp;m=593#g347.0">
	<title>Financial Emergency Measures in the Public Interest Bill 2009: Second Stage | D&amp;aacute;il debates</title>
	<link>http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-02-19.201.0&amp;m=593#g347.0</link>
	<description>I wish to share time with Deputy Kelleher. As the Title signifies, this is emergency legislation and it is deliberately drafted in this way because it is accepted by all parties that were things...</description>
	<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p pid="347.1">I wish to share time with Deputy Kelleher.</p><p pid="347.2">As the Title signifies, this is emergency legislation and it is deliberately drafted in this way because it is accepted by all parties that were things normal, such a Bill would not be required.  If we begin from that base, we can acquire a better grasp and understanding of what the State needs to do.  As the Taoiseach has made clear, the Government will have spending responsibilities this year amounting to approximately €55 billion while tax revenue is projected to be €37 million, which is an unsustainable gap.  I am sorry if the Labour Party, in particular, and Fine Gael, to a lesser extent, cannot appreciate that this is a serious position for the State.</p><p pid="347.3">It is the job of Opposition parties to oppose and we would do no differently, but if we were in opposition, bearing in mind what has happened, we would be a little more responsible.  Over the past few weeks, every Opposition party has engaged in a concerted attempt to talk down the State and undermine confidence in the business community.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	<dc:date>2009-02-19T13:00:00+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-02-11.784.0&amp;m=593#g1016.0">
	<title>Financial Transactions | D&amp;aacute;il debates</title>
	<link>http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-02-11.784.0&amp;m=593#g1016.0</link>
	<description>Hear, hear.</description>
	<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p pid="1016.1">Hear, hear.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	<dc:date>2009-02-11T17:00:00+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-02-11.784.0&amp;m=593#g839.0">
	<title>Financial Transactions | D&amp;aacute;il debates</title>
	<link>http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-02-11.784.0&amp;m=593#g839.0</link>
	<description>Let him finish.</description>
	<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p pid="839.1">Let him finish.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	<dc:date>2009-02-11T16:00:00+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-02-04.423.0&amp;m=593#g552.0">
	<title>Stabilisation of the Public Finances: Motion (Resumed) | D&amp;aacute;il debates</title>
	<link>http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-02-04.423.0&amp;m=593#g552.0</link>
	<description>We will have five minutes each.  It is important that there should be a mature appreciation not just in this House but among the population as to the seriousness of the current economic...</description>
	<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p pid="552.1">We will have five minutes each.  It is important that there should be a mature appreciation not just in this House but among the population as to the seriousness of the current economic situation.  It is perfectly right and reasonable to examine what we have done in recent years, to be positive where it is appropriate to be positive and to be critical where it is appropriate to be critical.  No Government ever gets it entirely right.  Governments make mistakes.  People make mistakes.  That is not unreasonable.  When one looks at what is happening in the United Kingdom, France, Spain, Germany, Greece and the United States of America, there is no doubt that this downturn in our economy is mirrored precisely, if it is not worse, in several economies.</p><p pid="552.2">The question thus arises as to what should be the response of the Government to a downturn of that magnitude.  In the main, I fully support the programme as set out yesterday by the Taoiseach and Minister for Finance.  It is a sensible first step.  However, I have to be honest about it; perhaps they should even have gone a little bit further because at this stage we do not know if this is a recession, a very deep recession or a depression.  If it is a depression the economic downturn could last for not just up to three years but possibly up to six years.  In that case our tax revenue would decrease even more, which would put our general budgetary situation under strain.</p><p pid="552.3">I am sure the Acting Chairman was in the Chamber when she heard the figures given to her party leader about the cost to the State of the unemployed, not just giving an unemployed person, correctly, social supports and unemployment benefit but also the cost to the State of lost tax revenue.  The real challenge for economic recovery is to deal with unemployment.  Not enough credit has been given to the previous Government and the one before that for having reduced unemployment and having secured the employment for the first time in the State of more than 2 million people — a not insignificant achievement.</p><p pid="552.4">The question now arises as to how we respond to the crisis.  The first step is to restore stability to the national financial and budgetary situation.  I am pleased the Taoiseach said that this morning.  The second step must be to get our competitiveness into line with other economies.  There are a few basic costs to any business.  One is the cost of capital, which has come down because interest rates are now cheap.  However, capital must also be available and that is why we are addressing the banking situation.</p><p pid="552.5">The second major ingredient in the cost of any business is the cost of labour.  Whether we like it, the cost of labour in this country is unacceptably high.  That goes from the top to the bottom.  The minimum wage in Ireland is just south of €9 per hour.  The minimum wage in Poland is approximately €2 per hour.  I do not advocate that we go down to that level but we need to examine every aspect of the price of labour in this State.  I hope to debate the matter with colleagues in the next few months.  I echo the comments made by Deputy Jim O’Keeffe, that double time on Sunday at the current rate is no longer sustainable.  It is no surprise that hotels are closing.  I call on the trade unions to show some leadership in that respect.  Ultimately, what is the point in having high wages if jobs are going to disappear?</p><p pid="552.6">I very much support the Government’s programme, as announced yesterday.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	<dc:date>2009-02-04T17:00:00+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-02-04.423.0&amp;m=593#g550.0">
	<title>Stabilisation of the Public Finances: Motion (Resumed) | D&amp;aacute;il debates</title>
	<link>http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2009-02-04.423.0&amp;m=593#g550.0</link>
	<description>I wish to share time with Deputy Conlon.</description>
	<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p pid="550.1">I wish to share time with Deputy Conlon.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	<dc:date>2009-02-04T17:00:00+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2008-11-20.293.0&amp;m=593#g314.0">
	<title>Special Report on New EU Legislation: Statements.   | D&amp;aacute;il debates</title>
	<link>http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2008-11-20.293.0&amp;m=593#g314.0</link>
	<description>I welcome the debate on this excellent report, which I will come back to in due course. It is worth remembering the genesis of this committee.  Credit should go to all parties concerned.  If I...</description>
	<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p pid="314.1">I welcome the debate on this excellent report, which I will come back to in due course.</p><p pid="314.2">It is worth remembering the genesis of this committee.  Credit should go to all parties concerned.  If I recall correctly, it was Deputy Ruairí Quinn who originally proposed the establishment of the scrutiny committee.  The Labour Party introduced legislation in regard to the European Union (Scrutiny) Act which, in fairness, we had no problem accepting.</p><p pid="314.3">Also, I pay tribute to former Deputy Gay Mitchell, the first chairman of the sub-committee on EU scrutiny who laboured in the basement very early in the morning for many years and did an excellent job getting this started.  I pay tribute to the current chairman of the committee, Deputy John Perry, who without question has given a new lease of life and new impetus to its work.  While paying tribute to these people, I join with other speakers who have praised the effervescent Minister with responsibility for European Affairs, Deputy Dick Roche, who has made Europe his métier.  As other speakers mentioned, he works much of the time on the sidelines doing valuable work in this area.</p><p pid="314.4">I am sure my colleagues will agree that what is contained in this report is of extreme importance to Ireland.  We must remember that EU legislation has a direct effect in Ireland.  People seem to forget this.  Not only has it a direct effect here but, legally, European law is superior to Irish law where a conflict arises, providing always that the European law is consistent and is part of the <i>acquis</i> of the various treaties.  What is contained in this report is of exceptional interest and concern to the Irish people.  It is, therefore, a good day for this Oireachtas that we are taking time out to examine and debate this report and to bring it to the attention of the Irish people.</p><p pid="314.5">Obviously, in the time available to me, it is not possible to go through the report in its entirety.  However, I commend the Chairman, Deputy Perry and the officials of the committee on putting together this report.  I agree the committee should be augmented and have made that point publicly on many occasions.</p><p pid="314.6">I recommend sending the report to all civil society organisations because they would find it interesting and useful.  It deserves a wider circulation than Members of the Houses.</p><p pid="314.7">This report would have been more relevant if we had voted for the Lisbon treaty because the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality would have given an impetus to our work.  For the first time, national parliaments would have been able to engage directly in the legislative process of the European Union.</p><p pid="314.8">The people have made their decision and I genuinely respect it.  However, it is my duty as a member of the Joint Committee on European Scrutiny to report to this House on the attitudes and feelings of our colleagues from other parliaments across Europe.  Some weeks ago, I accompanied Deputy Perry and the Chairman of the Joint Committee on European Affairs, Deputy Durkan, to a meeting in Paris of COSAC, which comprises six parliamentarians from every parliament in Europe.  The other delegates were polite and understanding about Ireland’s position but, beneath that layer, I sensed a growing impatience that the Lisbon process has not been allowed to progress.  It is analogous to a train station from which 25 out of 27 carriages have departed.  The remaining two carriages are asking the 25 which have commenced their journey to return.  The majority of the Irish people have decided not to join the European journey.  It is true that treaties cannot be changed other than by unanimity.  However, while Lisbon cannot proceed without the agreement of all 27 member states, some other form of enhanced co-operation could be decided by the 25 which have ratified the treaty.  That will leave Ireland in the shadow of a eurosceptic Britain while the rest of Europe moves on.  We would thereby undo all the good work done from the 1970s to the 1990s.  Alarm bells should be ringing to alert us to that prospect.</p><p pid="314.9">Some have argued that a second referendum would be undemocratic.  How can a referendum be undemocratic?  A second referendum will never take place without the agreement of this House, the Members of which are democratically elected.  It is, of course, a matter for the Government to decide after negotiations whether such a course of action is necessary.</p><p pid="314.10">It is claimed that the project is being led by political elites.  I do not consider the parliamentarians of France, Germany, Spain, Denmark and England as political elites.  Like ourselves, they are ordinary people who represent their electorates.  The argument that Lisbon is an elitist project is either dishonest or ill-informed.</p><p pid="314.11">In regard to the argument that Ireland got a bad deal, we got exactly the same deal as everybody else.  Nobody has said we were proportionately worse off than others.  It is bad enough that a country with a population of 4 million people will not have a Commissioner for five out of 15 years but it is a bigger deal when the same rule applies to a country of 80 million.  We have to compare our sacrifice with that of other countries.</p><p pid="314.12">The Joint Committee on European Scrutiny plays an important role.  Under the chairmanship of former Deputy Gay Mitchell, we used to meet in the basement at 8 a.m.  Our deliberations were not well reported but our profile has increased since we became a full committee under Deputy Perry.  I concur with Deputy Costello that the coverage of EU legislation and the committee’s work by the national broadcaster is a scandal.  I estimate that RTE spends more on Podge and Rodge than on informing the people of Ireland about important issues.  It argues that our work is not interesting to the average punter but, as Deputy Costello correctly pointed out, it is the job of the broadcaster to package these matters to make them interesting.  Every issue outlined in this report is of considerable importance to Irish people.  It may not be wrapped in interesting packaging but it covers everything from transport and public health to security and the Third World.  The director of RTE is failing in his job of properly and proportionately covering the European Union.  I challenge him to come before the Joint Committee on Communications, Energy and Natural Resources to justify his station’s abysmal coverage of European matters.</p><p pid="314.13">I commend the Joint Committee on European Affairs and its Chairman, and welcome the debate on this report.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	<dc:date>2008-11-20T14:00:00+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2008-10-14.704.0&amp;m=593#g733.0">
	<title>Financial Resolution No. 13: Stamp Duties | D&amp;aacute;il debates</title>
	<link>http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2008-10-14.704.0&amp;m=593#g733.0</link>
	<description>Unearned income deserves to be taxed, given the state of the national finances, but this should be a temporary measure.  At 20%, DIRT is too high.  We should encourage people to save.  If we do...</description>
	<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p pid="733.1">Unearned income deserves to be taxed, given the state of the national finances, but this should be a temporary measure.  At 20%, DIRT is too high.  We should encourage people to save.  If we do not, we are encouraging people to consume, to spend their money rather than save it.  That is not a good idea.</p><p pid="733.2">I wish to make a similar point on capital gains tax.  I support the measure on a temporary basis because we have little choice.  We all recall that capital gains tax used to be 40% and the former Minister, Charlie McCreevy, reduced it to 20%.  When he did that, he hugely increased the tax take from capital gains tax.  Similar to the DIRT issue, the more one raises capital gains tax the less people are inclined to take risks or dispose of their property, shares or whatever and one runs the risk that the tax take may go down.</p><p pid="733.3">Will the Tánaiste indicate whether the sum of €160 million is in addition to the normal take or if it is the total take from capital gains tax?  I agree with what Deputy Rabbitte said.  The take on capital gains in the next two or three years will be abysmally low.  I think I am correct in saying one can bring forward losses indefinitely.  In the past year or 18 months I estimate that tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of people have made large capital losses and they will be bringing them forward.  I fear that the take from capital gains will be very small.  However, I am not sure the Minister had an option.  Given the overall financial circumstances he probably did have to increase the tax, but if the net effect is to decrease the tax take then it might be a self-defeating item.</p><p pid="733.4">The rationale for the increase in capital gains tax given in the Budget Statement was a good one.  The Minister for Finance specifically outlined that it was to decrease the rate of commercial property stamp duty from 9% to 6%.  That is a laudable move because many people were simply not developing properties or buying commercial properties because the 9% rate of stamp duty was absolutely exorbitant.  I support the measure in the sense that it has made possible that decrease in stamp duty.  I also support it on the basis that it had to be done given the overall state of the national finances.</p><p pid="733.5">The capital gains tax increase should be only a temporary one.  As soon as economic conditions improve the rate should be reduced to 20% or even less.  We all know what a competitive environment there is for capital and if Ireland is not at the edge of the competition there is no future for us.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	<dc:date>2008-10-14T22:00:00+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2008-10-14.704.0&amp;m=593#g731.0">
	<title>Financial Resolution No. 13: Stamp Duties | D&amp;aacute;il debates</title>
	<link>http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2008-10-14.704.0&amp;m=593#g731.0</link>
	<description>I will consider the resolutions in order.  I join other Members in supporting Financial Resolution No. 9, which deals with the pensions issue.  The previous position was unnecessarily generous to...</description>
	<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p pid="731.1">I will consider the resolutions in order.  I join other Members in supporting Financial Resolution No. 9, which deals with the pensions issue.  The previous position was unnecessarily generous to high income earners and a threshold of €150,000 is totally acceptable.</p><p pid="731.2">In general, I support all these resolutions.  The Government is acting correctly to stabilise the national finances and to do otherwise would be irresponsible.  However, there is a duty on me, as a Member of the Dáil, to point out things that may not actually work.  My first concern is with regard to Financial Resolution No. 10 and income tax.  People are now very flexible with their money.  There are many markets throughout Europe and elsewhere where money can be invested, and many ways to invest.  The Minister will agree it has always been a policy of every Government to encourage people to save.  I am concerned that the more the rate of DIRT is raised, the more people will be disincentivised to save.</p><p pid="731.3">Does this measure apply to the post office?  If it applies fully to post office savings, then again there is no incentive for people to put money into the post office.  There is an argument for encouraging people to put money into a State or semi-State institution.  I agree with the point made by Deputy Rabbitte, but he appeared to say that all the money in deposit accounts is earned money, but that is not quite true.  There could be money on deposit that is not earned income.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	<dc:date>2008-10-14T22:00:00+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2008-10-14.427.0&amp;m=593#g452.0">
	<title>Financial Resolution No. 3: Income Tax | D&amp;aacute;il debates</title>
	<link>http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2008-10-14.427.0&amp;m=593#g452.0</link>
	<description>I also support resolution No. 2 which provides a good re-balancing for the first-time house buyer.  I am glad this and other measures have been targeted at the housing sector.  Despite the...</description>
	<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p pid="452.1">I also support resolution No. 2 which provides a good re-balancing for the first-time house buyer.  I am glad this and other measures have been targeted at the housing sector.  Despite the problems in the construction sector, from my experience there is still much demand for houses, both local authority and private.  Will the Taoiseach ensure the local authority scheme is closely monitored so that as many people as possible can get into it?</p>]]></content:encoded>
	<dc:date>2008-10-14T19:00:00+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2008-10-14.427.0&amp;m=593#g450.0">
	<title>Financial Resolution No. 3: Income Tax | D&amp;aacute;il debates</title>
	<link>http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2008-10-14.427.0&amp;m=593#g450.0</link>
	<description>It is unpalatable to the community at large when taxation has to be increased, no more so than in the case of this levy.  On balance, however, it is a fair compromise given the other provisions...</description>
	<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p pid="450.1">It is unpalatable to the community at large when taxation has to be increased, no more so than in the case of this levy.  On balance, however, it is a fair compromise given the other provisions in the budget and the need to raise revenue.  Will the Taoiseach confirm the figures the levy will raise in revenue?</p><p pid="450.2">People are prepared to contribute to raising revenue but I would temper that by saying they will want to see reform of the public sector as part of that equation, with which I know the Taoiseach agrees.  We will deal with the abolition of 41 State agencies later in the debate.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	<dc:date>2008-10-14T19:00:00+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2008-10-01.687.0&amp;m=593#g765.0">
	<title>Credit Institutions (Financial Support) Bill 2008: Committee Stage (Resumed) and Remaining Stages | D&amp;aacute;il debates</title>
	<link>http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2008-10-01.687.0&amp;m=593#g765.0</link>
	<description>I agree with the proposal in amendment No. 21 tabled by Deputy Richard Bruton.  There is no provision in the Bill that individual agreements should be laid before the House.  I accept that there...</description>
	<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p pid="765.1">I agree with the proposal in amendment No. 21 tabled by Deputy Richard Bruton.  There is no provision in the Bill that individual agreements should be laid before the House.  I accept that there might be problems with confidentiality but, subject to that consideration, I believe individual agreements should be laid before the House.  The proposal in amendment No. 24 is completely covered by section 6(9).  For that reason I oppose it.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	<dc:date>2008-10-01T12:00:00+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2008-10-01.687.0&amp;m=593#g762.0">
	<title>Credit Institutions (Financial Support) Bill 2008: Committee Stage (Resumed) and Remaining Stages | D&amp;aacute;il debates</title>
	<link>http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2008-10-01.687.0&amp;m=593#g762.0</link>
	<description>Are we to set up another tier of expertise?  We have people of the highest ability in the Central Bank and in the Financial Regulator&acirc;��s office and I will be damned if we are going to hire more...</description>
	<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p pid="762.1">Are we to set up another tier of expertise?  We have people of the highest ability in the Central Bank and in the Financial Regulator’s office and I will be damned if we are going to hire more people.  It is an insult to these people to say they are not capable of providing expertise.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	<dc:date>2008-10-01T12:00:00+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2008-10-01.687.0&amp;m=593#g760.0">
	<title>Credit Institutions (Financial Support) Bill 2008: Committee Stage (Resumed) and Remaining Stages | D&amp;aacute;il debates</title>
	<link>http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2008-10-01.687.0&amp;m=593#g760.0</link>
	<description>I wish to comment on some of the proposed amendments.  The key concept in section 6 is flexibility on the part of the Minister for Finance.  We are dealing here with six financial institutions,...</description>
	<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p pid="760.1">I wish to comment on some of the proposed amendments.  The key concept in section 6 is flexibility on the part of the Minister for Finance.  We are dealing here with six financial institutions, and potentially more than 30, which will have various obligations and share structures.  It is fallacious to think that we can devise a “one size fits all” approach to assisting these institutions.  It is essential that the legislation should give the Minister the flexibility to deal with every institution and every situation in its individuality.  Yes, he must report to the Dáil and be subject to Dáil approval, but he should not be hidebound.</p><p pid="760.2">Some of the comments by Deputies Burton and Bruton were not necessary.  Many of the points they made are already covered in the subsections.  For example, section 6(6) provides that the conditions under which the Minister provides financial support may include conditions regulating the commercial conduct of the credit institution or subsidiary to which the support is provided, and in particular may include conditions to regulate the competitive behaviour of that credit institution or subsidiary.  Subsection (7) goes on to provide that the credit institution must fulfil the requirements imposed by the Central Bank or other authority, including those in relation to the conduct of its business.  Those phrases are wide enough to encapsulate many of the points made by the two Deputies in the past few minutes.  Some of their amendments are completely unnecessary.                                                                                                                                                                                                       Subsections (6) and (7) of section 6 provide enough flexibility for the Minister to incorporate exactly what has been sought.</p><p pid="760.3">Another example is subsection (9) which provides that the Minister may subscribe for, take an allotment of or purchase shares and any other securities in a credit institution or subsidiary to which financial support is provided under this section on such terms as the Minister sees fit.  That appears to cover absolutely the proposal made by Deputy Burton with regard to the State taking a shareholding in a credit institution.  I do not believe her amendment is necessary.</p><p pid="760.4">Amendment No. 12 in the names of Deputies Joan Burton and Richard Bruton calls for three experts to report every six months to the Committee of Public Accounts.  We have the Central Bank and a financial regulator.  Why are they not capable of reporting to the Dáil or to any oversight committee set up by the Dáil?</p>]]></content:encoded>
	<dc:date>2008-10-01T12:00:00+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2008-10-01.687.0&amp;m=593#g714.0">
	<title>Credit Institutions (Financial Support) Bill 2008: Committee Stage (Resumed) and Remaining Stages | D&amp;aacute;il debates</title>
	<link>http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2008-10-01.687.0&amp;m=593#g714.0</link>
	<description>I want to address amendments Nos. 2 and 4.  I agree with certain of the sentiments in both these amendments, but the wording is such that I would be almost compelled to vote against them.  Deputy...</description>
	<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p pid="714.1">I want to address amendments Nos. 2 and 4.  I agree with certain of the sentiments in both these amendments, but the wording is such that I would be almost compelled to vote against them.  Deputy Burton should remember it is not just high-flying executives of the banks who have share options but hundreds, if not thousands, of ordinary employees in the banks who are motivated to work harder and more efficiently by these share options.  It would not be fair to punish ordinary employees and say they cannot have any share options as a result of what has happened.  Therefore, I would not be in a position to support the proposal in this regard.</p><p pid="714.2">I agree with Deputy Burton that the time has come, in a general sense, to consider the higher levels of remuneration in the banking system.  In the United States, in particular, we have witnessed obscene levels of remuneration.  Although I agree with the Deputy’s sentiment, this is not the time or place to address this matter because it requires further review.  Her proposal is not well thought out enough and we should, therefore, oppose it.</p><p pid="714.3">On amendment No. 4, I do not really disagree with the proposed new section 2(1).  However, I do disagree with the proposed section 2(2).  One does not want to strangle the banks.  People buy bank shares in the first instance to have a pension on their retirement.  A dividend for a common or garden investor is an essential part of the investment.  One will seen that one financial institution recently cut its dividend in half to do just what Deputy Bruton is proposing, that is, to recapitalise.  Of course it makes sense but it does not make sense for the Dáil to prescribe to banks what they can and cannot do.  The Minister indicated clearly that the financial institutions concerned will be paying for the guarantee, which is the correct approach.  The Minister stated — I accept his word on this and it will become evident in the future — the credit institutions will pay in proportion to the strength of the guarantee.  This is the way it should be done and it is totally wrong of Deputy Bruton to suggest that the payment of dividends be more or less suspended for the period in question.  Doing so could have the effect of destabilising the share price of the company on the international markets.  I ask him to reconsider his proposed amendment.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	<dc:date>2008-10-01T23:00:00+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2008-10-01.372.0&amp;m=593#g479.0">
	<title>Credit Institutions (Financial Support) Bill 2008: Committee Stage (Resumed) | D&amp;aacute;il debates</title>
	<link>http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2008-10-01.372.0&amp;m=593#g479.0</link>
	<description>This is going a little away from the matter of the amendment but I fully support the notion.  As for constitutional responsibility, that is the purpose of our Ministers.  It is the job of the...</description>
	<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p pid="479.1">This is going a little away from the matter of the amendment but I fully support the notion.  As for constitutional responsibility, that is the purpose of our Ministers.  It is the job of the Minister to come to the House, to be fully accountable and to say “I have made this scheme”, or “I have made this financial arrangement, I am standing here, I am proud of it and I am prepared to be accountable.”  That is the spirit of the Bill.</p><p pid="479.2">I commend the Minister for the annulment provision.  It is putting the cart before the horse to say the Bill could not come into being until a scheme is published.  I hope we have a constructive debate.  I urge the Minister to take on board any amendments from the Opposition in so far as they improve the Bill and I believe he will do this.  Many financial commentators throughout the world have said that what we have done over the past day or two is a model that can and will be followed by other nation states.  It is imperative we pass this Bill in the next few days.  This is not just for the banks, but for the entire Irish economy and its stability.  We must pass this Bill as quickly as possible.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	<dc:date>2008-10-01T17:00:00+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2008-10-01.372.0&amp;m=593#g477.0">
	<title>Credit Institutions (Financial Support) Bill 2008: Committee Stage (Resumed) | D&amp;aacute;il debates</title>
	<link>http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2008-10-01.372.0&amp;m=593#g477.0</link>
	<description>I will be totally open and honest with all good suggestions.</description>
	<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p pid="477.1">I will be totally open and honest with all good suggestions.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	<dc:date>2008-10-01T17:00:00+00:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2008-10-01.372.0&amp;m=593#g475.0">
	<title>Credit Institutions (Financial Support) Bill 2008: Committee Stage (Resumed) | D&amp;aacute;il debates</title>
	<link>http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2008-10-01.372.0&amp;m=593#g475.0</link>
	<description>Given the content of section 6(5), it would be a better idea that there should be a requirement on the Minister to have such a scheme passed by the House, rather than put the onus on the House to...</description>
	<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p pid="475.1">Given the content of section 6(5), it would be a better idea that there should be a requirement on the Minister to have such a scheme passed by the House, rather than put the onus on the House to bring a motion to annul such a scheme.  I mean this in a positive sense.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	<dc:date>2008-10-01T17:00:00+00:00</dc:date>
</item>


</rdf:RDF>