Joe O'Toole (Independent)

It is only right, proper and sensitive that the House debate the health services. While I support the proposal, it does not need to be taken before No. 1. After 7 p.m. may be an appropriate time, as people could get organised.

I am loath to get involved in a blame game, but we must examine the matter seriously. Benchmarks should be put in place in terms of what we expect from the health service and objectives for waiting lists, accident and emergency queues and cancer care should be set out during the next two years. People should be given one year to do what is expected before they reappear before the House to determine whether they have delivered. We should support or criticise them depending on whether things get done.

The House should debate the serious issue raised by the leader of the Opposition, Senator Fitzgerald. Each time there are problems, whether in terms of planning permission, interpretative centres and so on, people believe the situation will be improved if the politicians are removed. However, people ask about who is responsible the minute the politicians have been removed. Good or bad, we decided to take this matter out of politicians' hands. We should reconsider the issue.

I regret that I did not have the opportunity to make this point last week, but I call for a debate on the report of the Review Body on Higher Remuneration in the Public Sector. The body produced an excellent report, works for little pay and examines something that must be addressed. It exists because people would not trust politicians to do its work. The Taoiseach was 100% correct to accept his pay increase. He would have been a laughing stock in the country's pubs and elsewhere had he turned it down.

What should the Taoiseach be paid? I am regularly involved in negotiations. The body looked after our salaries five years and ten years ago. The Taoiseach is paid less than one tenth of the amount paid to someone running a bank, one half of the amount paid to a consultant and somewhat less than the only published figure for an amount paid to a daily newspaper editor. What should the Taoiseach be paid and what increase should he be given later?

I have examined the matter and there is no fair international comparison. Has anyone examined how much Members of other Parliaments receive in expenses? Peter Robinson and Gerry Adams, Westminster MPs, claimed expenses of nearly €250,000 each last year. We should compare like with like, read the information and discuss the issues. If we do not like who is the Taoiseach, we should get rid of him or her, which is a different ball game.

The Cathaoirleach will recall that the House addressed this matter previously. During the benchmarking process, some of my esteemed colleagues did not want to accept their increases. The Minister for Finance and I came up with the idea of a salary increase opt-out. The Taoiseach should bring that idea to the Cabinet. As to those whingers who, on the one hand, state they do not want increases but, on the other, put it in their back pockets, at the next Cabinet meeting the Taoiseach should give them little forms to sign for pay increases. If they do not sign, they can do without the increases instead of having it both ways, namely, whinging about it into microphones and going to banks with it at the end of the month. It is not on. We should support the review body and debate the report.