Shane Ross (Independent)

I welcome the Minister. I was about to criticise the fatuousness of debating a motion of this sort because Government motions are often used as platforms for self-congratulation and the Opposition merely goes through the motions in opposing them. That the Government has produced a motion of this sort and that it has been seriously addressed by the Minister for Finance is a welcome development. I thank him for coming to the House to listen to this two hour debate.

I welcome the debate on this matter. The Minister's contribution was extremely enlightening. I hope we can continue to engage in this kind of thing on an annual basis. It is something of a privilege for us to have the Minister here. It is particularly good that he is here, in the pre-budget period, to explain his philosophy. I am glad to say that it is a philosophy which, to some extent, was not altogether expected by some of us.

It is a tough time to be in opposition and it is difficult for the Opposition to be confronted with a motion of this sort because there is really no response to it. When the Government chooses the economy and the public finances as its ground and says "We are standing on this platform of fiscal rectitude and prosperity, contest it with us", the Opposition really ought to go home. This has been a period of extraordinary wealth, prosperity and great success, not only for the Government but also for the rainbow coalition when it was in power for a short period.

The amended motion is facile and silly and represents mere nit-picking at something which is undoubtedly a great success. Even though it is a tough time to be in opposition, we could have had somewhat of a more constructive debate, offered congratulations and given credit where it is due.

Senator McDowell in his speech quite rightly pointed out that the beginning of the Celtic tiger was some time around 1993. There are different theories for the origin of the Celtic tiger. Most political parties manage somehow to claim it for themselves, which is difficult to do because most of them were not in power for most of that period. The most unpalatable reason is possibly the most truthful one, that it is led by external factors. It is led by multinationals who came to this country because they found it attractive. The enormous growth in wealth is almost certainly multinational-led and is almost certainly — which is even more unpalatable in the present climate — US-led. I do not find that particularly comfortable to say but I think it is the truth of the matter. That could not have happened if the economic conditions in Ireland were not suitable for multinationals.

The Government and Deputy Cowen's predecessor deserve credit for creating the conditions which welcomed multinationals and kept them here so that they became an anchor and an integrated part of the Irish economy. These guys come here for one reason only, not for love of Ireland, not to give employment, not to help the Irish Government, but rather to make money. If they can make money and they can bring us wealth at the same time, what is wrong with that? It is only some sort of prehistoric xenophobia which makes us fear people from outside coming in and helping us to get rich. What this Government is doing now — and what the Minister said is very encouraging — and what the last Government did, was say to the multinationals, not in terms which I am using because it is politically harder for the Government, "Come on in, the water is warm and we will make it warmer for you." What the Minister said today was a form of code which is easy to understand. He said, "The water will stay warm." What he said was not the sort of happy-clappy economics which Fianna Fáil had to put up with in Inchydoney. He said——