Jim Walsh (Fianna Fail)

Like most Members of the House and people in the public service, I do not welcome a reduction in pay. However, most people, including many of the people interviewed in the media, recognise the seriousness of the situation and the fact that something must be done. This action might well preserve the very generous pensions we enjoy in the public service. Somebody who is earning €50,000 in the private sector would require a fund of approximately €1 million to buy a pension of €25,000 under the annuity schemes. What we have is extremely valuable and we must be seen to be paying our part.

I fully subscribe to the comments made by Mr. Jack O'Connor on the "Prime Time" television programme last night. It is indefensible if people on modest salaries in the public service are paying this levy and hospital consultants are not. I believe hospital consultants' fees should be revisited and renegotiated. They are not sustainable at the current level. The salary is €250,000 when a comparable position in the UK commands a salary of approximately £170,000. We should consider a serious adjustment in the fee. It definitely must be revisited because it must be seen to be fair.

I previously raised the issue of the legal fees extracted from this economy by barristers, particularly in the tribunals. I am aware of young people who have gone from college to work in the tribunals, doing what is effectively administrative work and who are millionaires after two or three years. That is unacceptable and must be tackled. It is not the 8% proposed by the Government which should be considered but a very significant reduction in the fees. The fees are €2,250 per day. The Government sought to reduce them to €969 but, following representations from one, if not two, of the chairmen of the tribunals, the fees were left at the current level. That must not continue. I am prepared to put my name to a motion, hopefully an all-party motion, calling on the Government to introduce a maximum fees order for the legal profession which will not be greater than the €969 per day, which was proposed. If other Members are of the same mind, they should contact me. I am prepared to put such a motion before the House. We should support such a motion. There must be equity and fairness.

Finally, Members might have seen the television programme last night which dealt with an issue of which we must be aware, that is, a trend towards or indications of protectionism in the major economies. We have seen it in Britain where protectionism is sought in segments of the labour market. There is a more serious situation in the United States, where the rescue package of the new administration is being hijacked in an effort to protect the steel industry there. If that happens, there will be huge adverse global effects and, with its open economy, Ireland will be exposed to them. I compliment Mr. John Bruton, who participated in the programme last night. He was excellent. He appeared before the Seanad previously. I believe we should invite experts on these issues to address the House in order that we can have a good, informed debate on matters of such significance.