Ivana Bacik (Independent)

It is a relief that something has been done. However, I echo the concerns of others on this side of the House with regard to the lack of any apparent quid pro quo for the taxpayer in this bailout. We need to know the guarantees the State, the public and the taxpayer have regarding the enormous potential risk we are taking on.

It seems that for too long we have privatised profit and now we are nationalising debt. Where is the gain for the taxpayer? Where is the return that may come about? I would be very interested to hear what there will be in it for the taxpayer. For too long we have seen what has been called "casino capitalism" run wild and we are now seeing the terrible consequences. As others have said those terrible consequences may not have been fully spelt out and it is still rather unclear. That may be why the US Congress did not pass the bailout Bill despite being urged to do so by their leaders.

In this context I raise before the House a relevant survey released yesterday by TASC, a think tank for action on social change, of which I am a board member. The survey pointed out the serious inequality in wealth distribution in this country after years of boom. As we debate this big rescue package it is important that we remember there is still enormous poverty here despite the Celtic tiger. The TASC survey found that the top 1% of the population owns 20% of the nation's wealth and we rank first among the previous EU 15 countries in terms of earnings inequality. TASC has shown that people are willing to have a fairer and more equitable tax system, which is what we should debate in the present economic situation.