Brendan Ryan (Labour)

I do not think Senator Brian Hayes was being in the least bit parochial when he mentioned yesterday's traffic problems. Fortunately, I did not have to use a car yesterday. The issue is not what happened in Dublin; rather, it is the perception senior public administrators have about their responsibilities to the public. They do not have to think through the consequences of their decisions. When they need to dig a hole in a road, they go through the necessary formulae and do nothing further. What happened yesterday was an example of their indifference to the public and its need to know.

When I returned to Dublin after my short absence from this House in 1997, I could see that traffic was a problem in the city. The planners and organisers in Dublin seem to think that a road can be closed without enormous consequences for the public. The disruption we witnessed yesterday is what happens when a city is full. I do not want to talk about Dublin traffic. I want to talk about the decision making and communications systems of senior public officials which seem to be sadly deficient.

I am seeking a debate on ethics in our society. Two different issues which relate to this have emerged recently. The council on science and innovation has released a report on medical research. While much in the report is good, it also contains a most unfortunate recommendation. It states that Ireland needs to become a location of choice for medical trials and that the country is losing such trials to other locations where securing ethical approval is less cumbersome.

I know why we have cumbersome approval mechanisms. The son of a friend of mine died in a medical trial 25 years ago. He was homeless and down on his luck at the time and certain inducements were offered to people to take part in medical trials. It was out of his death that we put together good regulations for clinical trials. When scientists, including me, are let loose on issues like this without ethical constraints, that is the daft kind of recommendation they come up with. I do not think Ireland should become an easy place to conduct medical trials. That is the direct opposite of what we want. I would like to debate that report. I know there are Members on all sides of the House who would be wary about making it easier for drugs to be trialled on people. When such trials are held, it is always the most vulnerable and least able to defend themselves who are on the receiving end of them. No matter what fine words might be said, if we do not have vigorous ethical regulation, there will be misuse, abuse and victimisation.

Related to this is the fact that our National Pensions Reserve Fund, which is now perhaps the biggest single investor in the country, has no ethical limitations on what it does with our money. Its counterpart in Norway, which uses both income tax and other tax revenues to build up a similar fund, has ethical constraints and manages to do very well. Our pensions reserve fund can be invested in the arms industry, about which we are so concerned because of the proliferation of arms in this country. It can be invested in embryonic stem cell research about which many citizens are very concerned. Indeed it may have to be invested there because it is required to invest in areas where the returns are greatest. If returns are greatest in some of these dubious areas of investment, it must invest there. I appeal to the Government to introduce ethical guidelines for the National Pensions Reserve Fund. It is a way of doing good in the world, and it is also a way of ensuring our consciences are not affronted by what our pensions reserve fund is used for.