Alex White (Labour)

As we are coming up to lunch time I will do what I can for my colleagues. My gentle banter across the floor with my namesake Senator Mary White should not be interpreted as showing ingratitude to the Minister of State for presenting his thoughts to this House. It is good to see the Minister of State here and it is important we have this debate. It is a stimulating debate for us and it is a pity more people did not have the opportunity to be here and contribute to it, however they have plenty of other things to do. At this time of year when we approach the budget, which is the key opportunity in the year for us to debate economic issues, it seems over the years we have become less inclined to debate these wider economic issues, even at the time we should debate them. In the budget we concentrate on the most important aspects, ensuring the show is kept on the road and the books balance. That is the first task required of a Government and a Minister for Finance, but this is about more than balancing the books. The impact of globalisation on our country, labour market and society is a significant question for our economy and society.

Senator Boyle said globalisation has had positive effects on our world. It has also had a differential impact on different countries. Ireland is fortunate to be in the "club" of countries that has done relatively well in the past ten years from the changes in the world economic order. That will not necessarily always be the case. I welcome the fact that the Minister of State is here. I am not sure whether we called for this debate, but I am pleased we are having it. That there has not been a clamour for it might be the basis for saying it is one of the most important debates we have had.

It is important we look to the future. The television news frequently reports the loss of 100 or 150 jobs. The evidence is that those jobs have gone to the Far East, China, India or elsewhere. There is almost a sense of powerlessness. This is not a party political point. We feel as though that happens in the big world and this country can do little to address it. A multinational company's decision to move a plant from Ireland to China cannot be stopped or addressed by the Government. However we can examine how to ameliorate the worst effects of those changes, not just in a remedial way, but to address what kind of economy we want to build for the future. We use phrases such as "innovation economy" and "knowledge based economy" but we must work out specifically what that will mean in policy terms. I commend the Minister of State on setting out the agenda points for that debate in the future. He goes further than that. It is a wider debate than just examining the financial position of the country in the context of the budget, important as that is.

I wonder about the quality and level of debate on this issue in our country. As the Minister of State pointed out in his speech, organisations such as FÁS and NESC have addressed these issues and have tried to foster a debate on competitiveness, skills, investment and the knowledge economy. They have tried to tease out that more clearly than has been done heretofore. However there is a danger that we see these forces as beyond our control and pull back from addressing them. We need a framework to allow us to grab hold of these issues and have a wider public debate, and to make decisions on the direction in which we want to go.

Although I agree with the Minister and other speakers who said the partnership process is vital, and nobody could gainsay that, it has been an indispensable element of our success in the past 20 years. However there are weaknesses in that process from the point of view of the political system. I compliment Senator Mary White on her efforts in these areas. If we are here for any purpose it is to lead debate on these major issues for the future. They are more important than those that can be left to the partnership process. One of the achievements of the partnership process has been to take people beyond their immediate sights. The trade unions and employers must see each other's arguments. However they are inevitably hidebound by their own direct and immediate interests. The point of having a political system and a democracy is that we have a forum for debating the issues without any of us being hidebound by a particular point of view, although we each have our own views and politics.

Although the Minister of State set out areas where the national development plan and other initiatives related to upskilling and education, we are behind internationally. Senator Quinn's point that we are behind in our funding of and attention to education is unanswerable and cannot be denied. Any serious international comparison will show that is the case. If we compare Ireland with other smaller globalised countries, the share of Government spending of GDP is relatively low. When we talk about public expenditure the conventional wisdom is that we should reduce it. While we do not want big, overarching Government in the traditional sense, this area may lead us to the conclusion that we need more active engagement by the Government and its Departments. That requires us to have skill sets in the public service, which we have, but to improve on that in order that the economic policy makers in the Departments such as Enterprise, Trade and Employment and Finance take a lead role and that this is backed up by investment through the budgets, particularly in areas as important as education.

I agree with what Senator Quinn said about skills. He said we need skills associated with newer industries, such as IT, and we want people who have skills that can be immediately employed in work. He also said we need people with conceptual skills and a wide grounding and an ability to move from one sector to another. We are also educating citizens, not just cogs in a wheel. We must ensure when we fashion our education and training policy we do not have a narrow sense of skilling people for a particular sector or industry, which could quickly disappear, given the way the economy has changed. There is a pragmatic reason for that but also a wider principle that we should have an education system that makes available a broad grounding for people of all ages through the important role played by further and second-chance education, as Senator Mary White said. The vital role that plays in the overall picture should not be forgotten.

I also agree with other speakers who emphasised the importance of entrepreneurial genius. There is an entrepreneurial ability and genius in this country and it should be fostered and promoted. As leader of the Labour Party in this House I have no difficulty associating my party with the promotion of policy that will foster an entrepreneurial spirit and new business, promote business and ensure there is economic development based on the skills and entrepreneurial abilities of our people.

However, I am anxious to make a point to which I hope the Minister of State will respond, although there might be an element of tension between us on it. Whereas we must press for development of innovation and our economy, we must also have fairness and equality. The Minister of State mentioned it briefly but I am seeking action on it. We have discussed the issue of immigration. We cannot have a situation where agency workers in this country are only filling a gap for employers who wish to avoid the traditional responsibilities of employers. It is happening too often. The Minister of State and others claim there is only anecdotal evidence of this but why would SIPTU, the largest trade union in the country, and Tesco, an exceptionally successful British retail chain, conclude an agreement on this issue, as they did recently? Tesco does not make agreements with trade unions unless there is a perception that there is a problem.