Paschal Donohoe (Fine Gael)

One year ago our party and the Government laid out competing visions for what should happen with the economy and the future of the country. On Tuesday, 1 May 2007 the then Minister for Finance and now Taoiseach, Deputy Brian Cowen, stated in reference to the plans Fine Gael had for the future of the economy and our intentions had we formed a Government that he intended to burn us slowly on a barbecue.

My question for the Leader is, who is taking the heat now? Given where we now stand, and the statement made by the Taoiseach last night on the need for painful corrective economic action, it is clear who is not taking the heat at the moment. It is not the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Deputy Mary Coughlan, who is paid per week what many would aspire to earn in a month. It is not the Minister for Finance, Deputy Brian Lenihan, who upon attaining one of the most important and prestigious offices of the State is now lamenting his misfortune at getting there.

In the absence of a clear vision and statement from the Government on the state of the economy and, more importantly, a clear and detailed plan regarding what will happen, we are now operating in a vacuum. We hear rumours and leaks regarding what will happen on vital projects which will make a difference to the futures of the people we seek to represent.

I raise two issues which serve as examples of such hearsay. There was a statement in a newspaper today referring to the metro north project. The article appears with a quote from an unnamed source stating metro north will be cancelled and, in any case, is seen as something of a luxury in the first place and will be the first to go. The project referred to is currently the largest infrastructural project in Europe, yet there is a quote in the public domain referring to it as a luxury.

The second point is that the project, which is of vast scope and size, is currently in the final throes of a tendering process. The Government is leading that process to try to get the best value for money. What is the status of the project? In light of leaks of this nature, how can we be sure that the Government is confident that it has the ability to deliver the project well?

The second example I wish to give relates to the issue of public private partnership housing projects throughout Dublin, which I have raised in the House previously. The Leader has great experience and knowledge of many of the areas in which the projects are to be located. Perhaps he is able to appreciate the need to deliver these projects with real immediacy. When I was talking this morning to the leader of one of these regeneration projects, he told me that he knows of people who have had to eat their dinner off their laps for many years because the units they are living in are so small and in such poor condition.

The people associated with the projects have taken the hard decision to engage in community consultation. They are trying to create a vision of how their communities can become better places in which to live. A month has passed since it was announced that the leading tenderer for these projects might not be able to deliver them. The communities in question are no clearer on what is happening. The Government needs to step in and say what is going to happen.

Some people say that economics is the science of allocating scarce resources between competing demands. I suggest that politics is the art of doing that. My party has made it clear many times this week that the Leader of the House and his Government colleagues need to recognise what is happening to the economy. The Government should publish a detailed plan outlining what it intends to do about these problems. In the absence of such a statement, a vacuum develops in which leaks and rumours can thrive. Those who are most in need of leadership from the Government are those who are suffering most.